GeForce 8800M GTX SLI vs GTX 285M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 285M and GeForce 8800M GTX SLI, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 285M
2010
1 GB GDDR3, 75 Watt
1.65

8800M GTX SLI outperforms GTX 285M by a significant 25% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking949883
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.521.09
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code nameG92NB8E-GTX
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 February 2010 (14 years ago)19 November 2007 (17 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores128192
Core clock speed600 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors754 million1508 Million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt130 Watt
Texture fill rate38.40no data
Floating-point processing power0.384 TFLOPSno data
Gigaflops576no data
ROPs16no data
TMUs64no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargelarge
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)no data
SLI options2-way-
MXM TypeMXM 3.0 Type-Bno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 1020 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth61 GB/sno data
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsSingle Link DVIVGALVDSHDMIDual Link DVIDisplayPortno data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)10
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL2.1no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 285M 1.65
8800M GTX SLI 2.06
+24.8%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 285M 6498
+2.7%
8800M GTX SLI 6326

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p21
−14.3%
24−27
+14.3%
Full HD29
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Elden Ring 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Dota 2 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Elden Ring 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Fortnite 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−17.6%
20−22
+17.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
World of Tanks 30−35
−18.2%
35−40
+18.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Dota 2 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−17.6%
20−22
+17.6%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring 0−1 1−2
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
World of Tanks 10−11
−30%
12−14
+30%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 0−1 1−2
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

This is how GTX 285M and 8800M GTX SLI compete in popular games:

  • 8800M GTX SLI is 14% faster in 900p
  • 8800M GTX SLI is 21% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the 8800M GTX SLI is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • 8800M GTX SLI is ahead in 37 tests (77%)
  • there's a draw in 11 tests (23%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.65 2.06
Recency 1 February 2010 19 November 2007
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 512 MB
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 130 Watt

GTX 285M has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 73.3% lower power consumption.

8800M GTX SLI, on the other hand, has a 24.8% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce 8800M GTX SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285M
GeForce GTX 285M
NVIDIA GeForce 8800M GTX SLI
GeForce 8800M GTX SLI

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 4 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 285M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 3 votes

Rate GeForce 8800M GTX SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.